Subject: Linux-Admin Digest #185
From: Digestifier <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 94 09:14:04 EDT

Linux-Admin Digest #185, Volume #2               Thu, 13 Oct 94 09:14:04 EDT

Contents:
  [Q] Pathway FTP fails (Andres Grino Brandt)
  Re: Intel Etherexpress net card problems: nasty "Rx buf.." messages (Eelco)
  Re: Accidentally 'bash' file permissions are made 000. Thus I am unable to Login. Any idea how to tackle. (Jinwoo Shin)
  Re: What's failed after Bogomips (Hallvard Paulsen)
  Re: Please don't post security holess... (M. K. Shenk)
  Re: Drat--lpd runs, but not lpr. (Dolf Smits)
  formatting tapes (Frank B. Brokken)
  Re: Please don't post security holess... (M. K. Shenk)
  Re: Please don't post security holess... (M. K. Shenk)
  Re: Mystery Chip...AMD (Brad Matthew Garcia)
  Linux and X (Michael Hutera)
  ISDN and Linux (Serge Solski u)
  "more" quit working.  HELP!!! (Tony Schwartz)
  can't boot need help.. (Anthony (Tony Reeves))
  Re: New Motif lib's for use with XFree 3.1 ? (Rajesh Raj)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Andres Grino Brandt)
Subject: [Q] Pathway FTP fails
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 02:29:13 GMT

Hi!

We have a Linux box conected to a Novell net.

We use Pathway Access for Dos and Windows, and I can use telnet (dos
and Windows) without problems, but FTP alway fails. I have tried:
        1. FTP from DOS to Linux.
        2. FTP from Windows to Linux.
        3. FTP from Linux to DOS (DOS with ftpd).

The problems is always a loss of the last 512 bytes Ethernet package
(maybe sometimes even more). Many times I simply loss the FTP connection
on entry.

I don't think it is Linux's fault, as Linux can do FTP with any machine
in the world, including our mainframes.

Currently I FTP from Linux to a local mainframe, and then ftp from DOS to that
mainframe to get the files into DOS. Novell and mainframes both run 
Pathway Access.

I have tried every posible parameter, both in DOS and in Linux.

Ideas?

-- 
Andres Grino Brandt                                            Casilla 14801
[email-masked]                                          Santiago 21 - Chile
* Ley Grino de la Economia: Todo tiene su costo, y alguien tiene que pagarlo *
        * Everything has a cost and someone must pay for it *

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Eelco)
Subject: Re: Intel Etherexpress net card problems: nasty "Rx buf.." messages
Date: 13 Oct 1994 04:41:17 GMT

Daniel Tran ([email-masked]) wrote:

: This is normal for Intel EtherExpress users.  Changing / upgrading kernel 
: won't help unless there is a newer version eexpress.c.  As of now, I don't 
: know if there is a newer version or if there will be one in the future.  
: Donald Becker (the author of this driver) told me something about the design 
: of EtherExpress that causes it to behave like that.

: I ended up switching to a Novell NE2000 and it has been solid ever since.

: Daniel Tran [email-masked]

Or do what I did, just add a small delay loop of 150 in the driver, and then
it works perfectly! 

[email-masked]

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Jinwoo Shin)
Subject: Re: Accidentally 'bash' file permissions are made 000. Thus I am unable to Login. Any idea how to tackle.
Date: 12 Oct 94 10:21:40 GMT

[email-masked] (N B Venkateswarlu) writes:

>boot floopy and also boot/root floppies. But could not succeed. I am using
>slackware version. Any ideas how I have to tackle this.

I don't understand why this shouldn't work. After you boot from floppy,
(which has its own copy of a shell) all you do is mount the harddrive 
partition and change the permission of bash. Can you give us more detail on
why this doesn't work?
-- 
Jinwoo Shin                             [email-masked]
System Administrator                    
Berkeley Sensor and Actuator Center

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Hallvard Paulsen)
Subject: Re: What's failed after Bogomips
Date: 11 Oct 1994 07:16:03 GMT

Eberhard Moenkeberg ([email-masked]) wrote:

: Hello Eduardo Jacob Taquet and all others,

: on 30.09.94 Eduardo Jacob Taquet wrote to All in USENET.COMP.OS.LINUX.ADMIN:

: EJT> I found that when booting Linux, just after bogomips line, (33.. Ok), i
: EJT> get a failed that seems not to be related to anything. Does anybody know
: EJT> what is this about?

: The Sony CDROM driver is just telling you that you have failed to
: build your own kernel. ;-)
: Greetings ... Eberhard

Actually I think this has something to do with to little memory
for kernel and such. On my slackware 2.0.0 boot kernel whith
CD-ROM support I got the message "memory is tight" (or similar)
very early in the bootup process. After calculating bongomips Ok,
I got a failed. (But not what failed..) After building a new kernel
without all the things I didn't need. The "memory is tight" message
went away, and after bongomips there is a two line message telling
how much memory is awailable and how much the kernel uses

However while running the original kernel, I did not notice any 
problems with it, even if it "failed"...

Hallvard.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (M. K. Shenk)
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
Date: 13 Oct 1994 05:17:50 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
Robin D. Wilson <[email-masked]> wrote:
>In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (M.  
>K. Shenk) writes:
>:In article <[email-masked]>,
>:La'szlo' Lada'nyi <[email-masked]> wrote:
>:>[email-masked] (M. K. Shenk) writes:
>:>[...]
>:>>>>                                        Penetrating the security of a 
>:>>>> computer system is totally harmless in and of itself.
>:>>>                       ^^^ LOOOK!  LOOOOK at this!  "in and of itself."
>:>>>This is your opinion, and you would probably find that 99% of 
>:>>>administrators will disagree with you.
>
>Mr. Shenk, you are _simply_ (and completely) WRONG!  Privacy is a _very_  
>significant thing.  You are advocating a way of life that leaves people no  
>choice but to completely conceal their private information within their own  
>heads.

You idiot.  Where do you see advocation?  Expression of an opinion
does not imply advocation of anything.   What I mean when I am
saying something is not what you might mean when you were saying the
same thing.   I am advocating nothing.  If you cared to read what I am
saying and not what you would like to hear, you would see that I
expressly have said that I do not believe this is a 'correct' thing
to do, merely that it is possible that it can do no harm.  Never do I
say this makes it 'okay' or do I advocate it.  Learn to read and think.

>
>Clearly, you have alot to learn about being _human_...

A lot is two words.  ;-)

I'm through with this thread.  Nobody seems to get it.  This (now
worthless) discussion simply stemmed from a response to a dogmatic view
about system crackers.  I don't care who you express an incorrect
view about, be it a murderer, I will attack it.  This does not
mean I am defending murder.  This does not mean I am advocating murder.  Do
you understand this?  Expressly: I do not advocate system cracking.  I 
also do not advocate blanket statements about system crackers, murderers
or anyone else.  If you have not the intellectual capacity to understand
why being correct even in damning someone or some group, no matter how
much one would like to just damn away indiscriminately, is important, then
I give up.   

This has become pedantic.  I apologize for the bandwidth I have wasted on
this.  If anyone feels they still need to 'straighten me out', take it
to mail.  
-- 
"A lot" is two words.  So is "every day," in most cases.  "Apostrophe-ess"
is used only in the case of the possessive or a contraction.  If you read, 
should see these things demonstrated correctly quite often.  Unless you
read ad copy.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Dolf Smits)
Subject: Re: Drat--lpd runs, but not lpr.
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 07:35:10 GMT

Jeff Arnholt ([email-masked]) wrote:
: I'd appreciate any advice on the following: when setting
: up my HP 4P laserjet on Linux (using LPT1), I'm able
: to print to the queue (IE, lpq shows that the file is
: waiting to print), but the printer never receives the
: file.  lpc gives some message like "lp unable to print--
: offline," but the printer behaves normally under DOS/WfW3.11.

: Any general suggests as to what to try next?  I've
: exhausted the possibilities in the HOWTO.  I'm fairly sure
: that an expert could troubleshoot this in minutes.
What does lpc stat give for messages?
Did you enable the printer?  (with lpc enable <printername>
Try this, if it doesn't work give the output of lpc stat over here and I will
have a second look at it

Luck,   Dolf

: Many thanks.

: ---
:    
: Jeff Arnholt: mail [email-masked]   
: Mayo Medical and Graduate Schools        
: 200 1st St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905

--
[email-masked]            D.F. Smits

Interduct
Delft University Clean Technology Institute
Rotterdamseweg 145
2628 AL  DELFT                        tel. (+31) 15 78 72 39
The Netherlands                       fax. (+31) 15 78 66 82

        Linux, The choice of a GNU generation
                                            (Anonymous)

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Frank B. Brokken)
Subject: formatting tapes
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1994 08:01:26 GMT

Dear Linuxers,

    If you ever have to format a tape to be used with a tapestreamer connected
    to the floppy-drive controller (like a Colorado Jumbo), you have to
    boot to DOS, then do a tape-format, then boot back to linux.
    The formatting takes about 1-2 hrs, and in the meantime you can't do
    anything else, because you're at DOS.

    From the bulletin board of Aragorn Computers (Eindhoven, the Netherlands)
    I recently retrieved the DOS program QS3.EXE which allows the recording
    and execution of keyboard macros. QS3 is a tape-formatting utility.

    Using its macro facility I can now format a tape while I'm away or asleep:
    Linux boots to dos, there a modified autoexec.bat waits, formatting the
    tape using the macro-program, booting back to linux thereafter.

    It works very smoothly. The QS3 program is contained in QS3.ZIP, and
    can be obtained from ftp.icce.rug.nl, directory pub/frank. There is also
    a small qs3.README file, in which you'll find more details about the
    procedure.
    
    Any questions or remarks ? Send me an e-mail.

    Frank Brokken
    ([email-masked])

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (M. K. Shenk)
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
Date: 12 Oct 1994 04:31:14 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
La'szlo' Lada'nyi <[email-masked]> wrote:
>[email-masked] (M. K. Shenk) writes:
>[...]
>>>>                                        Penetrating the security of a 
>>>> computer system is totally harmless in and of itself.
>>>                       ^^^ LOOOK!  LOOOOK at this!  "in and of itself."
>>>This is your opinion, and you would probably find that 99% of 
>>>administrators will disagree with you.
>>>
>>No.  This is a true statement.  READ.  "In and of itself."  Meaning--when
>>the system says "Password:" and I say "Susan" and I hang up, this is
>>totally harmless IN AND OF ITSELF.  If 99% of admins disagree, well, then 
>>99% of admins can't think straight. 

^^^ LOOOOK!  Read this.  Then read your response.  You start talking about
compiler use, etc.  No.  No.  Look.  Password: beavis  "Welcome to.." 
<CLICK>   Get it?

>This reminds me of the joke:
>A guy is driving on the higway and listens to the radio. It say: "Attention!
>There is a crazy driver driving the wrong way on the highway!" The guy is 
>amazed: "One? All of them!"...
>
>Seriously. I do not agree with you. If 99% of admins are against your opinion 
>you still might be right, but the probabilities are *very* low.

Not really.  Faith in the idea sort of depends on where you fall on the 
scale..   

>And if you want to be shown something you really steal when breaking in,
>then two things:

When you break in and USE THE SYSTEM.  Not when you break in.  Well, a few
cycles for the login program.  So I concede.

>CPU cycles. Others have to pay for them and you don't pay. (Yes, even 
>universities have a theoretical value for CPU hours and if they sell 
<snip>
>permission.
>These are just two examples and I'm sure there are more.

These examples do not bear on my statement, which was: (read..I
specified this rather directly..I am not talking about doing anything
with the system..) typing a correct response to a password prompt for
an account which is not yours and hanging up does no harm.  I'm not
talking here about any of that stuff.  I am not talking about using a
compiler.  I am not talking about typing ls.  I am talking about the mere
act of gaining entry.  Now go on and read the rest of my post.
>
>I do hope that in time you'll realize that you are mistaken - at least in
>the opinion of 99% of the admins.

That would be a very sad day.  Are you capable of representing 99% of admins?
Are you capable of reading the statement I made, not the one you think I
made, and refuting it?  Can anyone understand I am not defending crackers,
but trying to promote rationality in the issue?  Disliking some people or
some actions does not merit losing one's reason.  One must still see what 
is and what is not.  No contest that breaking in is "wrong."  I never
contested that, or if I did I certainly didn't mean to.  But read what I'm
saying and not what you think someone saying what I am saying would be
meaning.

>
>Laci Ladanyi

You seem to have missed my point.  For one thing, the original poster
is not capable of dictating what 99% of sysadmins believe, only what
he believes they believe.  Secondly.  Now.  Read:  the exact, singular
act of typing a correct response to a password prompt does no damage.  Ok,
it might leech several thousand CPU cycles.  What I am trying to point out
is that what one does DOES matter.  Why must this instantly be taken the
wrong way?  It may still be wrong to do it, because it is someone else's
property and they do not want you to do that.  But...true statement: 
the typing in of a correct password that is not yours and hanging up does
NO harm.  You have gained entry.  But done no harm.  It is possible to still
disagree with the act.  But no harm has been done.  Period.  Example:
you may touch me on the arm, doing me no harm.  But I may still rightfully
deny you that.  Can't you see there is no conflict here?  Simply because I
say an act does no harm does not mean I am defending that act.  I am
simply making a statement of fact about that act.

I am not opposed to "99% of all sysadmins."  I was opposed to one man's
opinion of what 99% of all sysadmins would think, and IF that is 
REALLY what they think, then I said they would be wrong.  Which they 
would be.  Read my statement.  Then tell me where you disagree.

Can someone propose a location where followups would be more germane?  
We're sort of off-topic.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (M. K. Shenk)
Subject: Re: Please don't post security holess...
Date: 12 Oct 1994 04:33:43 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
Dan Swartzendruber <[email-masked]> wrote:
>In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (M. K. Shenk) writes:
>>In article <[email-masked]>,
>>Patrick D. Ashmore <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>>M. K. Shenk ([email-masked]) wrote:
>
>[Horseshit deleted to save bandwidth]
>
>Listen, pal.  Personally, you can have whatever screwed-up,
>self-serving rationalization for violating other people's
>privacy, but it doesn't wash.  I mean, really.  Have you ever
>been a burglary victim?  Do you think it makes the victim feel
>less violated because the burglar entered through an unlocked
>door/window instead of forcing entrance?  Grow up, pinhead.

My.  I seem to have gotten your goat.  If you will re-read, I never
"rationalized" it.  I in fact believe I implied it was rather unacceptable.
However, I was trying to promote some thinking on the nature of
virtual vs. real tresspassing.  I seem to have struck an emotional chord
with you rather than a rational one.  Do you possess enough mental
sophistication to understand arguing a side without being on that
side?  I specifically indicated that I personally wouldn't want crackers
on my system.  Try and use your brain and not your gut.  Apparently, you
have been a burglary victim, and as is often the case with victims, you
are no longer able to think rationally about the issue.  All that is
left to you is an emotional, knee-jerk response.  This response is
pathetic whether or not what it is a reaction to is bad.  My condolences.
I certainly hope if I am ever victimized, I rise above it better than you
have.

G'day.            
>-- 
>
>#include <std_disclaimer.h>
>
>Dan S.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Brad Matthew Garcia)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.systems,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Mystery Chip...AMD
Date: 13 Oct 1994 11:08:59 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, 
[email-masked] (Daniel Zappala) writes:
|> 
|> In article <[email-masked]>, 
|> [email-masked] (John Palaima) writes:
|> > 
|> > Hah.  Apparently you didn't hear that the Am486 DX/2 66 could be safely
|> > over-clocked to run at 80Mhz.  All the DX2-80 is is a relabeled DX2-66.
|> > That's why it's not much more expensive.  It's the same chip.  Anyone wanna
|> > take bets that new 66Mhz chips will be "crippled" so they can't be over-
|> > clocked? :)  
|> > --
|> 
|> But a DX2-80 can't be just a relabeled, overclocked DX2-66.  It's bus speed has
|> to be 40 Mhz.
|> 
|> Daniel

I think that you are confused, Dan, between a relabled 66 MHz *system* and
a relabled 66 MHz *cpu*.  They simply put the 66 MHz chip on a 40 MHz
motherboard (which is also accomplished by changing the speed of the
motherboard) and...  TADA! - a 486DX2-80!
-- 
Brad M. Garcia                   Carnegie Mellon University 
   ____/  ____/  ____/ Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
  __/    /      __/   "The only Engineering department in the world where
_____/ _____/ _____/   the secretaries have the most powerful computers."

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Michael Hutera)
Subject: Linux and X
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 04:22:44 GMT

When I start up X the window is not centered. The whole screen shifts to the
right. Is there a way to center it?

Mike Hutera

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Serge Solski u)
Subject: ISDN and Linux
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 1994 03:30:38 GMT

        I noticed some talk before here about ISDN. A local service 
provider is going to be using ISDN in the near future, and I'd like to 
use it (a lot cheaper than 56K.)

        What is entailed in using ISDN with Linux? I take it there's an 
ISDN card for the computer. How does Linux use the card? Does it treat it 
like an ethernet card, or something else?

        Bell tells me I'll need an ISDN Terminal Adapter. What is that, 
and will I have that when I have the card? They give me an NT-1, whatever 
that is. 

        I get two "B" channels. Does one ISDN card only use one "B" 
channel? Can I use another ISDN card to have two 64K links to my service 
provider (assuming I pay them twice)?

        Is there any other information about ISDN that I'll need. Anyone 
putting together a FAQ for this? 

        Much thanks for any information anyone can give.

        -Mark
-- 
"Key chuckles. 'If Skinny Puppy, in terms of the movie _Alien_, is a
chest-burster, then Doubting Thomas is more of a face-hugger,' he informs,
as if that were an explanation."
                                                        -Keyboard, Jan '92

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Tony Schwartz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: "more" quit working.  HELP!!!
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 1994 22:55:43

Recently my 'more' program quit working.  I have tried several things with no 
success.   When I type 'more filename', it simply goes to the next line.  When 
I say "ls >more" I get a broken pipe error.

This seems really stupid but it has me whooped.  Any ideas???

Tony

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Anthony (Tony) Reeves)
Subject: can't boot need help..
Date: 12 Oct 1994 16:21:17 GMT

I have the yggdrasil plug and play linux, 

I can't get it to boot.. the floppy disk boots up, then it can't load
the kernel cause it can't find the cdrom..

I have a Medavision fusion 16 cdrom kit.. this is the sound blaster, cdrom
speakers thing.. cdrom works fine in dos, no problems..

but linux can't find... 

anyone know an option that I can feed the boot: prompt to make it work..

--
Tony Reeves                    |Email: [email-masked]
Hughes Business Communcations  |"what we have here, is a falure to 
GM Hughes Electronics          |communcate" 
Views expressed here have nothing to do with Hughes, GM or Elvis....

------------------------------

From: Rajesh Raj <rxr401@huxley>
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.i386unix,comp.windows.x.motif
Subject: Re: New Motif lib's for use with XFree 3.1 ?
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 1994 16:37:39 +1000

On 10 Oct 1994, Craig Groeschel wrote:

> This article is Linux-specific and Metro Link Motif-specific.
> Please hit n now if you're not interested.
>   
> In article <Pine.SUN.3.90.941008125857.26941A-100000@huxley>,
> Rajesh Raj  <rxr401@huxley> wrote:
> >I was in contact with [email-masked]. They have no plan to recompile 
> >Linux Motif 1.2.4 with X11R6 libraries. The tech guy advised me to use the 
> >old X11R5 libraries.
> 
> That's an interesting spin you have chosen to put on things.
> Yes, it's true we do not plan to update 1.2.x, but you left out why:
> 
> Motif 2.0 is out.  We are working on porting Motif 2.0 to Linux.

I am not trying to put "spin" on things. I posted what I gathered from 
your response. Yes, Motif 2.0 is out, and it is known that Motif-vendors 
are working on it. You are not revealing anything that was not known 30 
days ago when I bought Motif for Linux from you.

Now, as you have chosen to speak for Metrolink would you like to clarify 
a few things ?

        1.When do you propose to make Motif 2.0 for Linux available ? How 
          much would it cost me to upgrade ? [You did not reply to the 
          e-mail in which I had asked these questions.]

        2.Why is it that none of your advertisements (e.g., on tsx-11.mit.edu)
          indicate that Motif 1.2.4 would *only* run with X11R5 libraries ? 
          [Most companies mention the hardware/software requirements in their
          products.]

My decision to buy Metrolik Motif was based on your old ad (replaced on 
11 Oct.) on tsx-11.mit.edu, in which future updates were mentioned. At 
the time of purchase, I was not told that Metrolink "does not plan to 
update 1.2.4" although all of us knew that XFree86 3.1 was about to be 
released and XFree86 3.0 (X11R6) was available. What if I was running 
XFree86 3.0 ?

> In the meantime, allow me to explain how to make our Linux Motif work
> with XFree86-3.1.
> Yes, Virginia, Motif 1.2.x does work with X11R6, but we have
> to rely on the magic of shared libraries and dynamic linking.

People know that R4 libraries would be needed to compile/run R4 apps 
under X11R5. I am sure that there are many people running old versions of 
Motif with XFree86 3.1.
 
> 
> The short answer:
> 
> Install the libX11 and libXt of XFree86-2.1, and Motif will work.
> (Also be sure /usr/X386/lib is in your /etc/ld.so.conf, and run ldconfig.)
> The filename is XF86-2.1-lib.tar.gz, and it is available from
> your friendly neighborhood Linux archive.  Use archie to find one near you.
> 

Again, thanks for the advice. What about reshuffling config (templates, cf, 
rules) files and includes ? Do you imply that Motif apps can be compiled 
with R6 includes and templates without any problem ? My experience 
suggests otherwise.

> The long answer:
> 
> Motif applications compiled with 1.2.4 WILL WORK with XFree86-3.1 (X11R6).
> However, Motif 1.2.4 is based on X11R5, and it depends on
> R5's libX11 and libXt.  So all you need to do is keep those libraries
> (libX11 and libXt) from XFree86-2.1 installed on your system.
> Through the magic of dynamic linking, the proper libraries will be
> linked in.
> 
> I agree it would be nice if Motif would work seamlessly with R6,
> but this is the way things are:
> 
>   XFree86-2.1 is based on X11R5.
>   XFree86-3.1 is based on X11R6.
>           X11R5 != X11R6
> Motif 1.2.4 is      based on X11R5.
> Motif 2.0   is      based on X11R5.
> Motif 2.1   will be based on X11R6. (?)
> 

Does it mean that Motif 2.0 would also need X11R5 libraries ? 

> >As I have no plan to keep old libraries taking the disk-space, I removed 
> >motif from the disk altogether. Would somebody give me $100 for this 
> >package ?
> 
> This sounds to me like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
> Let's see how much space the old libraries actually take up:
> 
>  [list of libraries deleted]

The issue is not inadequate disk-space or old libraries. It is fine if 
the author of a freeware does not specify the requirements of running the 
program, but I have not known a commercial software that would not 
specify the software/hardware requirements on its package.

> Bottom line is that we support our customers, and we are working on
> providing the latest technology both in X and Motif.
> Pay no attention to the boilerplate:  I am speaking for Metro Link this time.

Well, in that case, reconsider the decision of not updating Motif 1.2.4. 
You would be doing us a great favour. What do you think your potential 
customers would feel, when they realise that the package they are 
going to buy is not going to work on their existing (X11R6) system 
without old libraries ?

Also, what is your policy regarding those people who have bought or are 
going to buy Motif 1.2.4 after X11R6 release ? Are they going to pay the 
full price for updating to Motif 2.0 ?

Raj

[email-masked]

------------------------------

** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **

The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:

    Internet: [email-masked]

You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.admin) via:

    Internet: [email-masked]

Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
    nic.funet.fi				pub/OS/Linux
    tsx-11.mit.edu				pub/linux
    sunsite.unc.edu				pub/Linux

End of Linux-Admin Digest
******************************